One- and two-stage surgical revision of peri-prosthetic joint infection of the hip: a pooled individual participant data analysis of 44 cohort studies

Enhancing Pathogen Detection in Implant-Related Infections through Chemical Antibiofilm Strategies: A Comprehensive Review

Implant-related infections (IRIs) represent a significant challenge to modern surgery. The occurrence of these infections is due to the ability of pathogens to aggregate and form biofilms, which presents a challenge to both the diagnosis and subsequent treatment of the infection. Biofilms provide pathogens with protection from the host immune response and antibiotics, making detection difficult and complicating both single-stage and two-stage revision procedures. This narrative review examines advanced chemical antibiofilm techniques with the aim of improving the detection and identification of pathogens in IRIs. The articles included in this review were selected from databases such as PubMed, Scopus, MDPI and SpringerLink, which focus on recent studies evaluating the efficacy and enhanced accuracy of microbiological sampling and culture following the use of chemical antibiofilm. Although promising results have been achieved with the successful application of some antibiofilm chemical pre-treatment methods, mainly in orthopedics and in cardiovascular surgery, further research is required to optimize and expand their routine use in the clinical setting. This is necessary to ensure their safety, efficacy and integration into diagnostic protocols. Future studies should focus on standardizing these techniques and evaluating their effectiveness in large-scale clinical trials. This review emphasizes the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration in developing reliable diagnostic tools and highlights the need for innovative approaches to improve outcomes for patients undergoing both single-stage and two-stage revision surgery for implant-related infections.

Comparable Results of Single and Two-Stage Exchange for Select Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Infection

INTRODUCTION

Although two-stage exchange has been the standard of care for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in the United States, single-stage exchange is emerging as an option in select patients. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of patients undergoing single-stage and two-stage exchange using strict surgical indications.

METHODS

We reviewed a consecutive series of 196 patients with diagnosed PJI undergoing revision total knee and hip arthroplasty from 2017 to 2021. Patients were excluded if they had PJI history, plastic surgery coverage, or extensive bone loss requiring endoprosthesis. We compared the number of patients PJI-free at 1-year follow-up using MusculoSkeletal Infection Society criteria and patients requiring re-revision between the single-stage and two-stage groups.

RESULTS

In total, 126 patients met inclusion criteria. Of 61 knee patients (48.4%), 22 underwent single-stage (36%) and 39 underwent two-stage (63.9%). Of 65 hip patients (51.6%), 38 underwent single-stage (58.5%) and 27 underwent two-stage (41.5%). At a mean follow-up of 1.95 ± 0.88 years, a higher rate of knee patients were classified as having treatment success in the single-stage group (77.3% versus 69.2%, P = 0.501), however with comparable septic failure rates (18.1% single-stage versus 17.9% two-stage; P = 0.982). At a mean follow-up of 1.81 ± 0.9 years, a higher rate of hip patients were classified as having treatment success in the single-stage group (94.7% versus 81.5%, P = 0.089), and more patients had septic failures in the two-stage group (18.5% versus 5.3%; P = 0.089). No differences were observed in the microorganism profile. More total complications (P = 0.021) and mortalities were found in the single-stage knee cohort than in the two-stage cohort (22.7% versus 2.6%; P = 0.011).

CONCLUSION

Single-stage arthroplasty is a viable alternative to standard two-stage exchange in patients with PJI without a history of infection and with no bone or soft-tissue compromise. Additional studies with longer term follow-up are needed to evaluate its efficacy.

Nanoadjuvant-triggered STING activation evokes systemic immunotherapy for repetitive implant-related infections

Repetitive implant-related infections (IRIs) are devastating complications in orthopedic surgery, threatening implant survival and even the life of the host. Biofilms conceal bacterial-associated antigens (BAAs) and result in a "cold tumor"-like immune silent microenvironment, allowing the persistence of IRIs. To address this challenge, an iron-based covalent organic framed nanoadjuvant doped with curcumin and platinum (CFCP) was designed in the present study to achieve efficient treatment of IRIs by inducing a systemic immune response. Specifically, enhanced sonodynamic therapy (SDT) from CFCP combined with iron ion metabolic interference increased the release of bacterial-associated double-stranded DNA (dsDNA). Immunogenic dsDNA promoted dendritic cell (DC) maturation through activation of the stimulator of interferon gene (STING) and amplified the immune stimulation of neutrophils via interferon-β (IFN-β). At the same time, enhanced BAA presentation aroused humoral immunity in B and T cells, creating long-term resistance to repetitive infections. Encouragingly, CFCP served as neoadjuvant immunotherapy for sustained antibacterial protection on implants and was expected to guide clinical IRI treatment and relapse prevention.

Local antibiotic delivery via intra-articular catheter infusion for the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

There is an increasing interest in the use of intra-articular (IA) antibiotic infusion as a stand-alone or adjuvant therapy to standard revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the evidence with respect to this up-and-coming treatment modality.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies published until April 2023 was conducted using PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE and Cochrane databases. Quality assessment was performed with the National Institute of Health quality assessment tool. Inclusion criteria were adult patients (≥ 18 years) with a mean follow-up of ≥ 11 months and a score ≥ 6 on the National Institute of Health quality assessment tool. Primary outcome was eradication of infection.

RESULTS

15 articles, encompassing 631 PJIs in 626 patients, were included in the final analysis, all level IV case series. The majority was treated with single-stage revision with adjuvant IA antibiotic infusion (79.1%). The remaining PJIs were treated with stand-alone IA antibiotic infusion (12.2%), DAIR (debridement, antibiotics and implant retention) with adjuvant IA antibiotic infusion (5.7%) or two-stage revision with adjuvant IA antibiotic infusion (3.0%). Mean duration of IA antibiotic infusion was 19 days (range 3-50). An overall failure rate of approximately 11% was found. In total 117 complications occurred, 71 were non-catheter-related and 46 were catheter-related. The most common catheter-related complications were premature loss of the catheter (18/46) and elevated blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and creatinine levels (12/46).

CONCLUSIONS

Due to the lack of comparative studies the (added) benefit of IA antibiotic infusion in the treatment of PJI remains uncertain. Based on the current evidence, we would advise against using it as a stand-alone treatment. A prospective randomized controlled trial using a well-described infusion protocol is needed to see if the potential benefits justify the increased costs and potential complications of this treatment modality.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of single-stage vs two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection: a call for a prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a severe complication of joint arthroplasty that causes significant pain and economic loss. This study aimed to determine whether the current evidence supports single-stage revision for PJI based on reinfection and reoperation rates.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, EBSCO, Medline, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to 30 May 2023 to identify studies that compared single-stage revision and two-stage revision for PJI. Data on reinfection and reoperation rates were pooled.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included a total of 40 studies with 8711 patients. Overall, there was no significant difference between single- and two-stage revision regarding the postoperative reinfection rate and reoperation rate. Subgroup analysis by surgery period and different surgical sites revealed no difference between the two groups in the reinfection and reoperation rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available evidence, our study did not identify a significant difference in reinfection and reoperation rates between single- and two-stage revision for PJI. Given the limitations in inclusion/exclusion criteria and the observed heterogeneity, we acknowledge the complexity of drawing strong conclusions. Therefore, we suggest that the choice between single- and two-stage revision should be carefully considered on an individual basis, taking into account patient-specific factors and further research developments.

Outcomes of culture-negative or -positive periprosthetic joint infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

This study overviewed the current database of studies on periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) to compare outcomes and antibiotic side effects in culture-negative or culture-positive PJIs and assess treatment options for culture-negative PJIs.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken using studies published before July 2022 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. All studies comparing treatment of culture-negative or -positive PJIs were included. Afterward, the infection control rate, periprosthetic or spacer fracture, hip joint or spacer dislocation, and antibiotic side effects in different treatment methods of PJI were analyzed.

RESULTS

Eleven studies involving 1,747 patients were included. Most studies clearly defined the infection control criteria: no pain or swelling, no wound drainage, normal serology, and normal radiographic findings. Patients were followed until treatment failure, death, or until the last clinical visit without evidence of treatment failure. The two types of PJIs did not differ significantly in infection control rates (culture-negative PJI 79.2% vs. culture-positive PJI 76.6%; odds ratio [OR]=1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.84 to 1.70), either after all types of surgical treatment or after two-stage revision arthroplasty (OR=1.12, 95% CI: 0.72 to 1.75), single-stage revision arthroplasty (OR=0.51, 95% CI: 0.19 to 1.37), or debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (OR=0.88, 95% CI: 0.50 to 1.54). Similarly, we did not find differences in periprosthetic or spacer fracture and hip joint or spacer dislocation. For culture-negative PJIs, the infection control rate was 85.2% after two-stage revision arthroplasty, 90.6% after single-stage revision arthroplasty, and 69.7% after debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention. Data pooled from three studies showed higher incidence of antibiotic side effects for culture-negative PJIs.

CONCLUSION

The clinical outcomes of one-stage revision and two-stage revision are comparable. Therefore, both of them can be considered in surgical treatment for culture-negative PJIs. In addition, limited data showed a higher incidence of antibiotic side effects in culture-negative PJIs.

One-stage revision for infected shoulder arthroplasty: prospective, observational study of 37 patients

Background

Periprosthetic joint infection is a severe complication of joint replacement surgery. Thus two-stage exchange remains the gold standard, one-stage exchange is now widely recommended. We hypothesized that, for patients with chronic periprosthetic shoulder infection (PSI), treatment with a one-stage exchange would be an effective approach to eradicate infection, relieve pain, and restore function to the involved shoulder.

Materials and methods

This monocenter cohort study in a Bone and Joint Infection Referral Center (11/2003-05/2020) included all patients with confirmed PSI treated by one-stage revision. Data were extracted from the prospective database, including demographics, infection characteristics, and functional evaluations (range of motion and Constant Score at admission and last follow-up). The primary outcome was the 2-year reinfection-free rate.

Results

We included 37 patients. The refection-free rate was 5%. The most commonly isolated pathogen was Cutibacterium acnes (68%), isolated alone (15 patients, 41%) or as polymicrobial infections (10 patients, 27%). The Constant Score increased significantly from 24 to 53 (P = .001). Range of motion (forward elevation, abduction) was also significantly improved after surgery. Mean active forward elevation increased significantly by 45° from 60° to 105° postoperatively (P < .001), mean abduction increased by 42° from 55° to 97° (P < .001).

Discussion

Results from our prospective cohort-extracted series suggest that one-stage revision is a reliable treatment with a low infection recurrence rate. Improved functional outcomes can be achieved with one-stage exchange. Our patients' overall functional results were similar to those previously reported for one-stage revision and better than those reported after two-stage exchange. Patients with multiple previous surgeries seem to have worse functional outcomes than the subgroup without surgery before the index arthroplasty.

Conclusions

Our results and literature search findings suggest that one-stage revisions effectively eradicate PSIs, with good functional outcomes.

Combining bacteriophage and vancomycin is efficacious against MRSA biofilm-like aggregates formed in synovial fluid

Background

Biofilm formation is a major clinical challenge contributing to treatment failure of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Lytic bacteriophages (phages) can target biofilm associated bacteria at localized sites of infection. The aim of this study is to investigate whether combination therapy of phage and vancomycin is capable of clearing Staphylococcus aureus biofilm-like aggregates formed in human synovial fluid.

Methods

In this study, S. aureus BP043, a PJI clinical isolate was utilized. This strain is a methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) biofilm-former. Phage Remus, known to infect S. aureus, was selected for the treatment protocol. BP043 was grown as aggregates in human synovial fluid. The characterization of S. aureus aggregates was assessed for structure and size using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and flow cytometry, respectively. Moreover, the formed aggregates were subsequently treated in vitro with: (a) phage Remus [∼10⁸ plaque-forming units (PFU)/ml], (b) vancomycin (500 μg/ml), or (c) phage Remus (∼10⁸ PFU/ml) followed by vancomycin (500 μg/ml), for 48 h. Bacterial survival was quantified by enumeration [colony-forming units (CFU)/ml]. The efficacy of phage and vancomycin against BP043 aggregates was assessed in vivo as individual treatments and in combination. The in vivo model utilized Galleria mellonella larvae which were infected with BP043 aggregates pre-formed in synovial fluid.

Results

Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images and flow cytometry data demonstrated the ability of human synovial fluid to promote formation of S. aureus aggregates. Treatment with Remus resulted in significant reduction in viable S. aureus residing within the synovial fluid aggregates compared to the aggregates that did not receive Remus (p < 0.0001). Remus was more efficient in eliminating viable bacteria within the aggregates compared to vancomycin (p < 0.0001). Combination treatment of Remus followed by vancomycin was more efficacious in reducing bacterial load compared to using either Remus or vancomycin alone (p = 0.0023, p < 0.0001, respectively). When tested in vivo, this combination treatment also resulted in the highest survival rate (37%) 96 h post-treatment, compared to untreated larvae (3%; p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

We demonstrate that combining phage Remus and vancomycin led to synergistic interaction against MRSA biofilm-like aggregates in vitro and in vivo.

Mortality and re-revision following single-stage and two-stage revision surgery for the management of infected primary hip arthroplasty in England and Wales

We compared the risks of re-revision and mortality between two-stage and single-stage revision surgeries among patients with infected primary hip arthroplasty. Patients with a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of their primary arthroplasty revised with single-stage or two-stage procedure in England and Wales between 2003 and 2014 were identified from the National Joint Registry. We used Poisson regression with restricted cubic splines to compute hazard ratios (HRs) at different postoperative periods. The total number of revisions and re-revisions undergone by patients was compared between the two strategies. In total, 535 primary hip arthroplasties were revised with single-stage procedure (1,525 person-years) and 1,605 with two-stage procedure (5,885 person-years). All-cause re-revision was higher following single-stage revision, especially in the first three months (HR at 3 months = 1.98 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14 to 3.43), p = 0.009). The risks were comparable thereafter. Re-revision for PJI was higher in the first three postoperative months for single-stage revision and waned with time (HR at 3 months = 1.81 (95% CI 1.22 to 2.68), p = 0.003; HR at 6 months = 1.25 (95% CI 0.71 to 2.21), p = 0.441; HR at 12 months = 0.94 (95% CI 0.54 to 1.63), p = 0.819). Patients initially managed with a single-stage revision received fewer revision operations (mean 1.3 (SD 0.7) vs 2.2 (SD 0.6), p < 0.001). Mortality rates were comparable between these two procedures (29/10,000 person-years vs 33/10,000). The risk of unplanned re-revision was lower following two-stage revision, but only in the early postoperative period. The lower overall number of revision procedures associated with a single-stage revision strategy and the equivalent mortality rates to two-stage revision are reassuring. With appropriate counselling, single-stage revision is a viable option for the treatment of hip PJI.

Microbial Persistence, Replacement and Local Antimicrobial Therapy in Recurrent Bone and Joint Infection

We report microbiological results from a cohort of recurrent bone and joint infection to define the contributions of microbial persistence or replacement. We also investigated for any association between local antibiotic treatment and emerging antimicrobial resistance. Microbiological cultures and antibiotic treatments were reviewed for 125 individuals with recurrent infection (prosthetic joint infection, fracture-related infection, and osteomyelitis) at two UK centres between 2007 and 2021. At re-operation, 48/125 (38.4%) individuals had an organism from the same bacterial species as at their initial operation for infection. In 49/125 (39.2%), only new species were isolated in culture. In 28/125 (22.4%), re-operative cultures were negative. The most commonly persistent species were Staphylococcus aureus (46.3%), coagulase-negative Staphylococci (50.0%), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (50.0%). Gentamicin non-susceptible organisms were common, identified at index procedure in 51/125 (40.8%) and at re-operation in 40/125 (32%). Gentamicin non-susceptibility at re-operation was not associated with previous local aminoglycoside treatment (21/71 (29.8%) vs. 19/54 (35.2%); p = 0.6). Emergence of new aminoglycoside resistance at recurrence was uncommon and did not differ significantly between those with and without local aminoglycoside treatment (3/71 (4.2%) vs. 4/54 (7.4%); p = 0.7). Culture-based diagnostics identified microbial persistence and replacement at similar rates in patients who re-presented with infection. Treatment for orthopaedic infection with local antibiotics was not associated with the emergence of specific antimicrobial resistance.

Development of evidence-based guidelines for the treatment and management of periprosthetic hip infection

Aims

Periprosthetic hip-joint infection is a multifaceted and highly detrimental outcome for patients and clinicians. The incidence of prosthetic joint infection reported within two years of primary hip arthroplasty ranges from 0.8% to 2.1%. Costs of treatment are over five-times greater in people with periprosthetic hip joint infection than in those with no infection. Currently, there are no national evidence-based guidelines for treatment and management of this condition to guide clinical practice or to inform clinical study design. The aim of this study is to develop guidelines based on evidence from the six-year INFection and ORthopaedic Management (INFORM) research programme.

Methods

We used a consensus process consisting of an evidence review to generate items for the guidelines and online consensus questionnaire and virtual face-to-face consensus meeting to draft the guidelines.

Results

The consensus panel comprised 21 clinical experts in orthopaedics, primary care, rehabilitation, and healthcare commissioning. The final output from the consensus process was a 14-item guideline. The guidelines make recommendations regarding increased vigilance and monitoring of those at increased risk of infection; diagnosis including strategies to ensure the early recognition of prosthetic infection and referral to orthopaedic teams; treatment, including early use of DAIR and revision strategies; and postoperative management including appropriate physical and psychological support and antibiotic strategies.

Conclusion

We believe the implementation of the INFORM guidelines will inform treatment protocols and clinical pathways to improve the treatment and management of periprosthetic hip infection.

Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(4):226–233.

Partial Two-Stage Exchange for Infected Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Treatment to Take into Account

INTRODUCTION

Two-stage revision is the gold standard for chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The removal of well-fixed implants, especially the femoral component, can be extremely difficult and additional osteotomies may be needed, which is time-consuming and results in bone stock loss. When the femoral stem is osseointegrated, there is no clear indication for the use of partial two-stage revision. The primary objective was to assess infection eradication after surgery.

METHODS

Retrospective study of specific case series. A total of eight patients with a chronic uncemented PJI, in the setting of complex revision surgeries, were treated with partial two-stage revision, which included selective retention of the well-fixed femoral component and complete acetabular removal. Stem retention was carried out regardless of the bacteria or associated comorbidities.

RESULTS

All patients were re-revision cases with at least two previous surgeries (range, 2-4). Complex revisions were performed in five cases (non-articulated spacer) and simple revisions in three cases (articulated spacer). The minimum follow-up time was 24 months (range, 24-132 months). The infection eradication rate at final follow-up was 100%.

CONCLUSION

Partial two-stage reconstruction is a promising technique for the treatment of chronic PJI in patients with a well-fixed stem and complex re-revision acetabular procedures. Further prospective studies and prolonged follow-ups are required to confirm our results.

Establishment of a Novel Rat Model of Gram-Negative Periprosthetic Joint Infection Using Cementless Hip Hemiarthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Gram-negative periprosthetic joint infections (GN-PJIs) present unique challenges. Our aim was to establish a clinically representative GN-PJI model that recapitulates biofilm formation in vivo. We also hypothesized that biofilm formation on the implant surface would affect its ability to osseointegrate.

METHODS

Three-dimensionally-printed medical-grade titanium hip implants were used to replace the femoral heads of male Sprague-Dawley rats. GN-PJI was induced using 2 bioluminescent Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains: a reference strain (PA14-lux) and a mutant biofilm-defective strain (ΔflgK-lux). Infection was monitored in real time using an in vivo imaging system (IVIS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Bacterial loads were quantified utilizing the viable colony count. Biofilm formation at the bone-implant interface was visualized using field-emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM). Implant stability, as an outcome, was directly assessed by quantifying osseointegration using microcomputed tomography, and indirectly assessed by identifying gait-pattern changes.

RESULTS

Bioluminescence detected by the IVIS was focused on the hip region and demonstrated localized infection, with greater ability of PA14-lux to persist in the model compared with the ΔflgK-lux strain, which is defective in biofilm formation. This was corroborated by MRI, as PA14-lux induced relatively larger implant-related abscesses. Biofilm formation at the bone-implant interface induced by PA14-lux was visualized using FE-SEM versus defective-biofilm formation by ΔflgK-lux. Quantitatively, the average viable colony count of the sonicated implants, in colony-forming units/mL, was 3.77 × 108 for PA14-lux versus 3.65 × 103 for ΔflgK-lux, with a 95% confidence interval around the difference of 1.45 × 108 to 6.08 × 108 (p = 0.0025). This difference in the ability to persist in the model was reflected significantly on implant osseointegration, with a mean intersection surface of 4.1 × 106 ± 1.99 × 106 μm2 for PA14-lux versus 6.44 × 106 ± 2.53 × 106 μm2 for ΔflgK-lux and 7.08 × 106 ± 1.55 × 106 μm2 for the noninfected control (p = 0.048).

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this proposed, novel in vivo biofilm-based model is the most clinically representative for GN-PJI to date, since animals can bear weight on the implant, poor osseointegration was associated with biofilm formation, and localized PJI was assessed by various modalities.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This model will allow for more reliable testing of novel biofilm-targeting therapeutics.

Infection after total joint replacement of the hip and knee: research programme including the INFORM RCT

Background

People with severe osteoarthritis, other joint conditions or injury may have joint replacement to reduce pain and disability. In the UK in 2019, over 200,000 hip and knee replacements were performed. About 1 in 100 replacements becomes infected, and most people with infected replacements require further surgery.

Objectives

To investigate why some patients are predisposed to joint infections and how this affects patients and the NHS, and to evaluate treatments.

Design

Systematic reviews, joint registry analyses, qualitative interviews, a randomised controlled trial, health economic analyses and a discrete choice questionnaire.

Setting

Our studies are relevant to the NHS, to the Swedish health system and internationally.

Participants

People with prosthetic joint infection after hip or knee replacement and surgeons.

Interventions

Revision of hip prosthetic joint infection with a single- or two-stage procedure.

Main outcome measures

Long-term patient-reported outcomes and reinfection. Cost-effectiveness of revision strategies over 18 months from two perspectives: health-care provider and Personal Social Services, and societal.

Data sources

National Joint Registry; literature databases; published cohort studies; interviews with 67 patients and 35 surgeons; a patient discrete choice questionnaire; and the INFORM (INFection ORthopaedic Management) randomised trial.

Review methods

Systematic reviews of studies reporting risk factors, diagnosis, treatment outcomes and cost comparisons. Individual patient data meta-analysis.

Results

In registry analyses, about 0.62% and 0.75% of patients with hip and knee replacement, respectively, had joint infection requiring surgery. Rates were four times greater after aseptic revision. The costs of inpatient and day-case admissions in people with hip prosthetic joint infection were about five times higher than those in people with no infection, an additional cost of > £30,000. People described devastating effects of hip and knee prosthetic joint infection and treatment. In the treatment of hip prosthetic joint infection, a two-stage procedure with or without a cement spacer had a greater negative impact on patient well-being than a single- or two-stage procedure with a custom-made articulating spacer. Surgeons described the significant emotional impact of hip and knee prosthetic joint infection and the importance of a supportive multidisciplinary team. In systematic reviews and registry analyses, the risk factors for hip and knee prosthetic joint infection included male sex, diagnoses other than osteoarthritis, high body mass index, poor physical status, diabetes, dementia and liver disease. Evidence linking health-care setting and surgeon experience with prosthetic joint infection was inconsistent. Uncemented fixation, posterior approach and ceramic bearings were associated with lower infection risk after hip replacement. In our systematic review, synovial fluid alpha-defensin and leucocyte esterase showed high diagnostic accuracy for prosthetic joint infection. Systematic reviews and individual patient data meta-analysis showed similar reinfection outcomes in patients with hip or knee prosthetic joint infection treated with single- and two-stage revision. In registry analysis, there was a higher rate of early rerevision after single-stage revision for hip prosthetic joint infection, but, overall, 40% fewer operations are required as part of a single-stage procedure than as part of a two-stage procedure. The treatment of hip or knee prosthetic joint infection with early debridement and implant retention may be effective in > 60% of cases. In the INFORM randomised controlled trial, 140 patients with hip prosthetic joint infection were randomised to single- or two-stage revision. Eighteen months after randomisation, pain, function and stiffness were similar between the randomised groups (p = 0.98), and there were no differences in reinfection rates. Patient outcomes improved earlier in the single-stage than in the two-stage group. Participants randomised to a single-stage procedure had lower costs (mean difference –£10,055, 95% confidence interval –£19,568 to –£542) and higher quality-adjusted life-years (mean difference 0.06, 95% confidence interval –0.07 to 0.18) than those randomised to a two-stage procedure. Single-stage was the more cost-effective option, with an incremental net monetary benefit at a threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year of £11,167 (95% confidence interval £638 to £21,696). In a discrete choice questionnaire completed by 57 patients 18 months after surgery to treat hip prosthetic joint infection, the most valued characteristics in decisions about revision were the ability to engage in valued activities and a quick return to normal activity.

Limitations

Some research was specific to people with hip prosthetic joint infection. Study populations in meta-analyses and registry analyses may have been selected for joint replacement and specific treatments. The INFORM trial was not powered to study reinfection and was limited to 18 months’ follow-up. The qualitative study subgroups were small.

Conclusions

We identified risk factors, diagnostic biomarkers, effective treatments and patient preferences for the treatment of hip and knee prosthetic joint infection. The risk factors include male sex, diagnoses other than osteoarthritis, specific comorbidities and surgical factors. Synovial fluid alpha-defensin and leucocyte esterase showed high diagnostic accuracy. Infection is devastating for patients and surgeons, both of whom describe the need for support during treatment. Debridement and implant retention is effective, particularly if performed early. For infected hip replacements, single- and two-stage revision appear equally efficacious, but single-stage has better early results, is cost-effective at 18-month follow-up and is increasingly used. Patients prefer treatments that allow full functional return within 3–9 months.

Future work

For people with infection, develop information, counselling, peer support and care pathways. Develop supportive care and information for patients and health-care professionals to enable the early recognition of infections. Compare alternative and new treatment strategies in hip and knee prosthetic joint infection. Assess diagnostic methods and establish NHS diagnostic criteria.

Study registration

The INFORM randomised controlled trial is registered as ISRCTN10956306. All systematic reviews were registered in PROSPERO (as CRD42017069526, CRD42015023485, CRD42018106503, CRD42018114592, CRD42015023704, CRD42017057513, CRD42015016559, CRD42015017327 and CRD42015016664).

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 10, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Clinical and cost effectiveness of single stage compared with two stage revision for hip prosthetic joint infection (INFORM): pragmatic, parallel group, open label, randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether patient reported outcomes improve after single stage versus two stage revision surgery for prosthetic joint infection of the hip, and to determine the cost effectiveness of these procedures.

DESIGN

Pragmatic, parallel group, open label, randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

High volume tertiary referral centres or orthopaedic units in the UK (n=12) and in Sweden (n=3), recruiting from 1 March 2015 to 19 December 2018.

PARTICIPANTS

140 adults (aged ≥18 years) with a prosthetic joint infection of the hip who required revision (65 randomly assigned to single stage and 75 to two stage revision).

INTERVENTIONS

A computer generated 1:1 randomisation list stratified by hospital was used to allocate participants with prosthetic joint infection of the hip to a single stage or a two stage revision procedure.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary intention-to-treat outcome was pain, stiffness, and functional limitations 18 months after randomisation, measured by the Western Ontario and McMasters Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score. Secondary outcomes included surgical complications and joint infection. The economic evaluation (only assessed in UK participants) compared quality adjusted life years and costs between the randomised groups.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants was 71 years (standard deviation 9) and 51 (36%) were women. WOMAC scores did not differ between groups at 18 months (mean difference 0.13 (95% confidence interval -8.20 to 8.46), P=0.98); however, the single stage procedure was better at three months (11.53 (3.89 to 19.17), P=0.003), but not from six months onwards. Intraoperative events occurred in five (8%) participants in the single stage group and 20 (27%) in the two stage group (P=0.01). At 18 months, nine (14%) participants in the single stage group and eight (11%) in the two stage group had at least one marker of possible ongoing infection (P=0.62). From the perspective of healthcare providers and personal social services, single stage revision was cost effective with an incremental net monetary benefit of £11 167 (95% confidence interval £638 to £21 696) at a £20 000 per quality adjusted life years threshold (£1.0; $1.1; €1.4).

CONCLUSIONS

At 18 months, single stage revision compared with two stage revision for prosthetic joint infection of the hip showed no superiority by patient reported outcome. Single stage revision had a better outcome at three months, fewer intraoperative complications, and was cost effective. Patients prefer early restoration of function, therefore, when deciding treatment, surgeons should consider patient preferences and the cost effectiveness of single stage surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN registry ISRCTN10956306.

Mortality and re-revision following single-stage and two-stage revision surgery for the management of infected primary knee arthroplasty in England and Wales : evidence from the National Joint Registry

Aims

We compared the risks of re-revision and mortality between two-stage revision surgery and single-stage revision surgery among patients with infected primary knee arthroplasty.

Methods

Patients with a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of their primary knee arthroplasty, initially revised with a single-stage or a two-stage procedure in England and Wales between 2003 and 2014, were identified from the National Joint Registry. We used Poisson regression with restricted cubic splines to compute hazard ratios (HR) at different postoperative periods. The total number of revisions and re-revisions undergone by patients was compared between the two strategies.

Results

A total of 489 primary knee arthroplasties were revised with single-stage procedure (1,390 person-years) and 2,377 with two-stage procedure (8,349 person-years). The adjusted incidence rates of all-cause re-revision and for infection were comparable between these strategies (HR overall five years, 1.15 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87 to 1.52), p = 0.308; HR overall five years, 0.99 (95% CI 0.70 to 1.39), p = 0.949, respectively). Patients initially managed with single-stage revision received fewer revision procedures overall than after two-stage revision (1.2 vs 2.2, p < 0.001). Mortality was lower for single-stage revision between six and 18 months postoperative (HR at six months, 0.51 (95% CI 0.25 to 1.00), p = 0.049 HR at 18 months, 0.33 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.99), p = 0.048) and comparable at other timepoints.

Conclusion

The risk of re-revision was similar between single- and two-stage revision for infected primary knee arthroplasty. Single-stage group required fewer revisions overall, with lower or comparable mortality at specific postoperative periods. The single-stage revision is a safe and effective strategy to treat infected knee arthroplasties. There is potential for increased use to reduce the burden of knee PJI for patients, and for the healthcare system.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(10):690–699.

A review of current practices in periprosthetic joint infection debridement and revision arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection remains a significant challenge for arthroplasty surgeons globally. Over the last few decades, there has been much advancement in terms of treatment and diagnosis, however, the fight rages on. As management of periprosthetic joint infections continues to evolve, it is critical to reflect back on current debridement practices to establish common ground as well as identify areas for future research and improvement. BODY: In order to understand the debridement techniques of periprosthetic joint infections, one must also understand how to diagnose a periprosthetic joint infection. Multiple definitions have been elucidated over the years with no single consensus established but rather sets of criteria. Once a diagnosis has been established the decision of debridement method becomes whether to proceed with single vs two-stage revision based on the probability of infection as well as individual patient factors. After much study, two-stage revision has emerged as the gold standard in the management of periprosthetic infections but single-stage remains prominent with further and further research.

CONCLUSION

Despite decades of data, there is no single treatment algorithm for periprosthetic joint infections and subsequent debridement technique. Our review touches on the goals of debridement while providing a perspective as to diagnosis and the particulars of how intraoperative factors such as intraarticular irrigation can play pivotal roles in infection eradication. By providing a perspective on current debridement practices, we hope to encourage future study and debate on how to address periprosthetic joint infections best.

Is debridement really the best we can do for periprosthetic joint infections following total ankle replacements? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Ankle periprosthetic joint infections are rising in number, but an evidence-based gold standard treatment has not been defined yet.

METHODS

We made a systematic review about the operative treatment of infections following total ankle arthroplasty. Proportional meta-analysis was used to summarize effects of the surgical techniques included. Primary outcome of this study was infection eradication, followed by complications, re-interventions, amputation rates and functions.

RESULTS

We included six studies(113 patients) reporting 6 types of surgical interventions, mostly irrigation and debridement (35.4%) and two-stage revisions (24.8%). No differences among all analyzed techniques were found in the infection eradication outcome as well as in the secondary outcomes. Patients receiving a permanent spacer are most likely to end up with amputation.

CONCLUSIONS

Literature dealing with infections after total ankle replacement is currently composed by few low-quality articles. The overlapping of confidence intervals related to all analyzed interventions showed no superiority of either technique.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Predictors of Success With Chronic Antibiotic Suppression for Prosthetic Joint Infections

BACKGROUND

Management of recurrent prosthetic joint infection (PJI) after attempted surgical eradication remains a challenge. Chronic antibiotic suppression (CAS) is regarded as a reasonable treatment option for select patients with persistent infection or multiple comorbidities. The study seeks to compare cohorts who succeed and fail with CAS.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study assesses patients who were treated with CAS for a PJI. Patients were included if they had a culture-proven PJI and received chronic suppressive antibiotics. Failure of suppression was defined as reoperation after initiating CAS or death occurring as result of infection. A Cox proportional hazards multivariate regression model was used to estimate risk of reoperation as a function of risk factors related to patient comorbidities, surgical history, affected joint, and infecting organism.

RESULTS

We identified 45 PJIs (31 knees, 14 hips) managed with CAS with a median follow-up of 50 (95% confidence interval [CI] 33.61-74.02) months. The overall success rate of managing PJI with CAS was 67% (30/45). Controlling for body mass index and Gram status of the organism, total hip arthroplasty patients were less likely than total knee arthroplasty patients to require reoperation (hazard ratio 0.18, 95% CI 0.01-0.96, P = .04). Patients with Gram-positive infections were less likely than those with a Gram-negative infections to require reoperation (hazard ratio 0.22, 95% CI 0.05-0.88, P = .03). Severe antibiotic side effects were rare. Patients who experienced multiple changes to their antibiotic regimen were more likely to fail with CAS.

CONCLUSION

CAS is a reasonable strategy in patients with PJI who lack or refuse further surgical treatment options. Most hips and Gram-positive infections treated with CAS successfully avoided reoperation in this cohort.

High re-revision rate following one-stage exchange for streptococcal periprosthetic joint infection of the hip

INTRODUCTION

This study was undertaken to analyse the outcome of 1-stage exchange in the management of streptococcal periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the hip at a single hospital.

METHODS

We identified 30 patients with a streptococcal PJI of the hip who had been treated by 1-stage exchange at our hospital between 2002 and 2017. Postoperative complications and the need for any subsequent re-revision for infection or other reasons were analysed. The Harris Hip Score (HHS) was evaluated at final follow-up.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up was 8.2 years (SD 4.1). The overall re-revision rate for any reason was 53% (16/30) at a mean 5.3 years (SD 0.68 years). Re-revision for infection was 20% (6/30) at a mean 1.8 years (SD 0.74 years). All re-revisions for PJI (6/6; 100%) were for relapse of the streptococcal infection. At final follow-up, the mean HHS was 68 points (SD 20).

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of re-revision after 1-stage exchange for streptococcal PJI is high. Eradication of a streptococcal PJI of the hip remains challenging. Further extensive and comparative studies between 1-and 2-stage exchange are encouraged.

Dysautonomia in COVID-19 Patients: A Narrative Review on Clinical Course, Diagnostic and Therapeutic Strategies

Introduction

On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization sounded the COVID-19 pandemic alarm. While efforts in the first few months focused on reducing the mortality of infected patients, there is increasing data on the effects of long-term infection (Post-COVID-19 condition). Among the different symptoms described after acute infection, those derived from autonomic dysfunction are especially frequent and limiting.

Objective

To conduct a narrative review synthesizing current evidence of the signs and symptoms of dysautonomia in patients diagnosed with COVID-19, together with a compilation of available treatment guidelines.

Results

Autonomic dysfunction associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection occurs at different temporal stages. Some of the proposed pathophysiological mechanisms include direct tissue damage, immune dysregulation, hormonal disturbances, elevated cytokine levels, and persistent low-grade infection. Acute autonomic dysfunction has a direct impact on the mortality risk, given its repercussions on the respiratory, cardiovascular, and neurological systems. Iatrogenic autonomic dysfunction is a side effect caused by the drugs used and/or admission to the intensive care unit. Finally, late dysautonomia occurs in 2.5% of patients with Post-COVID-19 condition. While orthostatic hypotension and neurally-mediated syncope should be considered, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) appears to be the most common autonomic phenotype among these patients. A review of diagnostic and treatment guidelines focused on each type of dysautonomic condition was done.

Conclusion

Symptoms deriving from autonomic dysfunction involvement are common in those affected by COVID-19. These symptoms have a great impact on the quality of life both in the short and medium to long term. A better understanding of the pathophysiological mechanisms of Post-COVID manifestations that affect the autonomic nervous system, and targeted therapeutic management could help reduce the sequelae of COVID-19, especially if we act in the earliest phases of the disease.

Antibiotic-free antimicrobial poly (methyl methacrylate) bone cements: A state-of-the-art review

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the most serious complication following total joint arthroplasty, this being because it is associated with, among other things, high morbidity and low quality of life, is difficult to prevent, and is very challenging to treat/manage. The many shortcomings of antibiotic-loaded poly (methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) bone cement (ALBC) as an agent for preventing and treating/managing PJI are well-known. One is that microorganisms responsible for most PJI cases, such as methicillin-resistant S. aureus, have developed or are developing resistance to gentamicin sulfate, which is the antibiotic in the vast majority of approved ALBC brands. This has led to many research efforts to develop cements that do not contain gentamicin (or, for that matter, any antibiotic) but demonstrate excellent antimicrobial efficacy. There is a sizeable body of literature on these so-called "antibiotic-free antimicrobial" PMMA bone cements (AFAMBCs). The present work is a comprehensive and critical review of this body. In addition to summaries of key trends in results of characterization studies of AFAMBCs, the attractive features and shortcomings of the literature are highlighted. Shortcomings provide motivation for future work, with some ideas being formulation of a new generation of AFAMBCs by, example, adding a nanostructured material and/or an extract from a natural product to the powder and/or liquid of the basis cement, respectively.

Periprosthetic Joint Infection (PJI)—Results of One-Stage Revision with Antibiotic-Impregnated Cancellous Allograft Bone—A Retrospective Cohort Study

Controversy exists regarding the optimal treatment of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), considering control of infection, functional results as well as quality of life. Difficulties in treatment derive from the formation of biofilms within a few days after infection. Biofilms are tolerant to systemically applied antibiotics, requiring extreme concentrations for a prolonged period. Minimum biofilm eradicating concentrations (MBEC) are only feasible by the local application of antibiotics. One established approach is the use of allograft bone as a carrier, granting a sustained release of antibiotics in very high concentrations after appropriate impregnation. The purpose of this study was to determine the rate of reinfection after a one-stage revision of infected hip or knee prostheses, using antibiotic-impregnated allograft bone as the carrier and avoiding cement. Between 1 January 2004 and 31 January 2018, 87 patients with PJI, according to MSIS, underwent a one-stage revision with antibiotic-impregnated cancellous allograft bone. An amount of 17 patients had insufficient follow-ups. There were 70 remaining patients (34 male, 36 female) with a mean follow-up of 5.6 years (range 2–15.6) and with a mean age of 68.2 years (range 31.5–86.9). An amount of 38 hips and 11 knees were implanted without any cement; and 21 knees were implanted with moderate cementing at the articular surface with stems always being uncemented. Within 2 years after surgery, 6 out of 70 patients (8.6%, CI 2–15.1) showed reinfection and after more than 2 years, an additional 6 patients showed late-onset infection. Within 2 years after surgery, 11 out of 70 patients (15.7%, CI 7.2–24.2) had an implant failure for any reason (including infection) and after more than 2 years, an additional 7 patients had an implant failure. Using Kaplan-Meier analysis for all 87 patients, the estimated survival for reinfection was 93.9% (CI 88.8–99.1) at 1 year, 89.9% (CI 83.2–96.6) at 2 years and 81.5% (CI 72.1–90.9) at 5 years. The estimated survival for implant failure for any reason was 90.4% (CI 84.1–96.7) at 1 year, 80.9% (CI 72.2–89.7) at 2 years and 71.1% (CI 60.3–81.8) at 5 years. One-stage revision with antibiotic-impregnated cancellous allograft bone grants comparable results regarding infection control as with multiple stages, while shortening rehabilitation, improving quality of life for the patients and reducing costs for the health care system.

Two stage revision: indications, techniques and results

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most challenging complications a surgeon has to face after prosthetic replacement of a joint and one of the most devastating complications for the patient. During the 2018 International Consensus Meeting (ICM) in Philadelphia a numerical diagnostic tool was proposed. Contraindications to single stage revision include significant soft tissue injury with the inability to provide soft tissue cover, the presence of unknown or multi resistant organisms, lack of access to appropriate antibiotics or lack of appropriate expertise. Two stage revision surgery is indicated in these situations. Insall et al. described the surgical two-stage prosthetic revision technique in 1983: the in situ prosthesis is removed, a thorough debridement of bone and soft tissue is performed, an interval spacer is inserted, antibiotics administered. The 2nd stage of definitive reconstruction is performed once the infection is deemed to have resolved. The interval between stages can range from 6 weeks to several months. PJI are very challenging for every surgeon skilled in prosthetic surgery. It's necessary to make an exact preoperative diagnosis and to treat them with the proper technique. Further studies are needed to establish the perfect timing between the two stages, the duration of the antibiotic therapy and to standardize the diagnostic chart.

Effective Treatment of Single-Stage Revision Using Intra-Articular Antibiotic Infusion for Polymicrobial Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BACKGROUND

The treatment of polymicrobial periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) confronted distinct challenges. No reports have assessed the efficacy of local antibiotic delivery combined with 1-stage exchange in polymicrobial PJI.

METHODS

Between January 2013 and December 2018, we retrospectively analyzed the data of 126 patients, including 19 polymicrobial PJIs and 107 monomicrobial PJIs, who underwent single-stage revision using intra-articular antibiotic infusion. The risk factors, microbiology, infection control rate, and clinical outcomes were compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Higher body mass index, presence of a sinus tract, and prior revisions were the risk factors for polymicrobial PJI. Isolation of Staphylococcus epidermidis, Streptococcus, Enterococcus, and Gram-negative pathogens was highly associated with polymicrobial PJI. Of the 19 polymicrobial PJIs, only 2 patients occurred infection recurrence, which is similar with the result of 6 of 107 patients in the monomicrobial PJI (P = .225). The Harris Hip Score of the polymicrobial group showed no difference from that of the monomicrobial group (78 vs 80; P = .181). Nevertheless, the polymicrobial group exhibited inferior Hospital for Special Surgery knee score relative to the monomicrobial group (77 vs 79; P = .017).

CONCLUSION

With rational and targeted use of antibiotics, single-stage revision can effectively control polymicrobial infections, and achieve favorable outcomes similar to that in monomicrobial patients. However, this regimen is still needed to be further confirmed, especially in the infections with different microbial species simultaneously. Additionally, obese patients with a sinus tract and those who had prior revisions had a greater risk of polymicrobial PJI.

A Retrospective Observational Cohort Study of Periprosthetic Hip Infection Treated by one-stage Method Including Cases With Bone Graft Reconstruction

Purpose:

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication that can affect hip arthroplasty. Its treatment is extremely difficult, and issues regarding the optimal treatment remain unanswered. This study intended to show the effectiveness of the one-stage treatment of PJI.

Materials and Methods:

A retrospective observational cohort study performed from July 2014- August 2018. All patients with suspected PJI were included. Major and minor criteria developed by the International Consensus on Periprosthetic Joint Infection (ICPJI) was used to define infection. Laboratory tests and image exams were performed, and all patients were followed for at least 2 years.

Outcomes:

Success rate (2018 ICPJI definition to success) in treatment of PJI using one-stage revision method. Clinical and functional outcomes defined by Harris Hip Score (HHS).

Results:

Thirty-one patients were screened and 18 analyzed. 69.85 ± 9.76 years was the mean age. Mean follow-up time was 63.84 ± 18.55 months. Ten patients had acetabular defects and required bone graft reconstruction. Sixteen patients were classified as Tier 1, 1 as Tier 3D, and as 1 Tier 3E. Almost 90% of patients submitted to one-stage revision with acetabulum graft reconstruction were free of infection. The overall infection survival rate was 78.31±6.34 months. Candida albicans and sinus tract were statistically significant in univariate Cox’s analysis. The predictor of one-stage revision surgery failure that remained final Cox’s regression model was C. albicans (hazard ratio [HR]: 4.47).

Conclusion:

Treatment through one-stage revision surgery associated with 6 months of antimicrobial is a viable option with acceptable results even when bone graft reconstruction is necessary. C. albicans was a strong predictor of failure in this cohort.

[Strategic approach in periprosthetic joint infections]

With rising numbers of revisions of total arthroplasty procedures of the lower extremities, the annual number of cases of implant-associated infection are also increasing. The conventional two-stage replacement strategy often leads to increased morbidity and mortality of patients; however, in the literature a one-stage exchange procedure shows equally good results if the indications are strictly defined. In addition to the correct diagnostics, the patient history, the inserted implant, the state of health and when applicable the pathogens present play an important role. If, among other factors, the pathogen is uncomplicated combined with a good bone and soft tissue situation and without a large number of previous operations, a single stage replacement of the endoprosthesis may be a suitable option. Despite existing controversies in the literature, this treatment approach seems to demonstrate a reduced hospitalization, reduced costs and improved patient satisfaction with the same re-revision rate. This review article explains the strategic approach to chronic infections of endoprostheses of the lower extremities based on clinical examples and a review of the current literature.

What Is the Mid-term Survivorship of Infected Rotating-hinge Implants Treated with One-stage-exchange?

BACKGROUND

Despite the growing number of studies reporting on periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), there is little information on one-stage exchange arthroplasty for the revision of infected rotating-hinge prostheses, which can be among the most difficult PJI presentations to treat.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

After one-stage direct exchange revision for an infected rotating-hinge TKA prosthesis, and using a multimodal approach for infection control, we asked: (1) What is the survivorship free from repeat revision for infection and survivorship free from reoperation for any cause? (2) What is the clinical outcome, based on the Oxford Knee Score, of these patients at the latest follow-up?

METHODS

Between January 2011 and December 2017, we treated 101 patients with infected rotating-hinge knee prostheses at our hospital. All patients who underwent a one-stage exchange using another rotating-hinge implant were potentially eligible for this retrospective study. During that period, we generally used a one-stage approach when treating PJIs. Eighty-three percent (84 of 101) of patients were treated with one-stage exchange, and the remainder were treated with two-stage exchange. Of the 84 treated with one-stage exchange, eight patients died of unrelated causes and were therefore excluded, one patient declined to participate in the study, and another eight patients were lost before the minimum study follow-up of 2 years or had incomplete datasets, leaving 80% (67 of 84) for analysis in this study. The included study population consisted of 60% males (40 of 67) with a mean age of 64 ± 8 years and a mean (range) BMI of 30 ± 6 kg/m2 (21 to 40). The mean number of prior surgeries was 4 ± 2 (1 to 9) on the affected knee. Fifteen percent (10 of 67) of knees had a preoperative joint communicating sinus tract, and 66% (44 of 67) had experienced a prior PJI on the affected knee. The antimicrobial regimen was chosen based on the advice of our infectious disease consultant and individually adapted for the organism cultured. The mean follow-up duration was 6 ± 2 years. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed using the endpoints of survivorship free from repeat revision for infection and survivorship free from all-cause revision. The functional outcome was assessed using the Oxford Knee Score (on a 12- to 60-point scale, with lower scores representing less pain and greater function), obtained by interviewing patients for this study at their most recent follow-up visit. Preoperative scores were not obtained.

RESULTS

The Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated an overall survivorship free from reoperation for any cause of 75% (95% CI 64% to 87%) at the mean follow-up of 6 years postoperatively. Survivorship free from any repeat operative procedure for infection was 90% (95% CI 83% to 97%) at 6 years. The mean postoperative Oxford Knee Score was 37 ± 11 points.

CONCLUSION

With an overall revision rate of about 25% at 6 years and the limited functional results based on the poor Oxford Knee Scores, patients should be counseled to have modest expectations concerning postoperative pain and function level after one-stage exchange of an infected rotating-hinge arthroplasty. Nevertheless, patients may be informed about a reasonable chance of PJI eradication and might opt for this approach as a means to try to avoid high transfemoral amputation or joint arthrodesis, which in this population often is associated with the inability to ambulate at all. Regarding the relatively high number of patients with aseptic loosening, future studies might focus on implant design of revision knee systems as well. A longer course of oral antibiotics after such procedures may also be warranted to limit the chance of reinfection but requires further study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study.

A systematic review of phage therapy applied to bone and joint infections: an analysis of success rates, treatment modalities and safety

Bone and joint infections are difficult to treat, and increasing antibiotic resistance has only made them more challenging. This has led to renewed interest in phage therapy (PT). The aim of this systematic review was to determine success rate, current treatment modalities and safety of PT in bone and joint infections.A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases as well as the journal PHAGE for literature published between January 2000 and April 2021 was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines to identify all human studies assessing bacteriophages as therapy for bone and joint infections. All study designs and patient populations were eligible. The review's primary outcome was success rate.Twenty records describing a total of 51 patients and 52 treatment episodes were included. No randomized controlled studies were identified. The overall success rate was 71% (n = 37/52). Topical administration alone was the most frequent administration route (85%, n = 44/52). Antibiotics were administered concomitantly with PT in the majority of treatments (79%, n = 41/52), and surgery was performed for 87% (n = 45/52) of treatment episodes. Four minor adverse events related to PT were reported, representing 8% (n = 4/52) of treatment episodes.PT for bone and joint infections has not been evaluated in any randomized controlled clinical study, and current administration modalities are highly variable between case reports and case series. While publications included here show potential benefit and few adverse effects, clinical trials are warranted to assess the efficacy of PT for bone and joint infections and determine optimal treatment modalities. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:1148-1156. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210073.

COVID-19 Collateral Damage: Management of Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Malaysia

Background and objective

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the dreaded complications in patients after arthroplasty surgeries, owing to the risk of morbidity and arduous investigations and management associated with it. Nevertheless, as Malaysia is currently battling against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-induced coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic head-on, the treatment for other non-life-threatening diseases including PJI has taken a backseat. In this study, we present a case series of 11 patients with PJI who were managed surgically at the largest tertiary hospital in Malaysia and we hope to shed some light on the difficulties we have encountered during this trying period.

Patients and methods

Patients with PJIs who underwent surgical intervention during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic (March 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021) were reviewed and included in this study. The demographic profile of the patients, presenting complaints, prosthesis topography, biochemical investigative findings, surgical interventions, and short-term outcomes were summarized.

Results

A total of 11 patients were treated surgically at Hospital Kuala Lumpur for PJI. Among them, five patients are still awaiting their second-stage surgeries despite the completion of their antibiotic regimes, and they are fit for the procedure.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic has wreaked havoc on the treatment of patients with PJI. In a setting with scarce resources, surgeons should strongly consider single-stage revision surgeries for the treatment of patients with PJI.

Clindamycin-loaded titanium prevents implant-related infection through blocking biofilm formation

Implant-related infection is a disastrous complication. Surface modification of titanium is considered as an important strategy to prevent implant-related infection. However, there is no recognized surface modification strategy that can be applied in clinic so far. We explored a new strategy of coating. The clindamycin-loaded titanium was constructed by layer-by-layer self-assembly. The release of clindamycin from titanium was detected through high performance liquid chromatography. Different titanium was co-cultured with Staphylococcus aureus for 24 h in vitro, then the effect of different titanium on bacterial colonization and biofilm formation was determined by spread plate method and scanning electron microscopy. Cytotoxicity and cytocompatibility of clindamycin-loaded titanium on MC3T3-E1 cells were measured by CCK8. The antibacterial ability of clindamycin-loaded titanium in vivo was also evaluated using a rat model of osteomyelitis. The number of osteoclasts in bone defect was observed by tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase staining. Bacterial burden of surrounding tissues around the site of infection was calculated by tissue homogenate and colony count. Clindamycin-loaded titanium could release clindamycin slowly within 160 h. It reduced bacterial colonization by three orders of magnitude compare to control (p < .05) and inhibits biofilm formation in vitro. Cells proliferation and adhesion were similar on three titanium surfaces (p > .05). In vivo, clindamycin-loaded titanium improved bone healing, reduced microbial burden, and decreased the number of osteoclasts compared control titanium in the rat model of osteomyelitis. This study demonstrated that clindamycin-loaded titanium exhibited good biocompatibility, and showed antibacterial activity both in vivo and in vitro. It is promising and might have potential for clinical application.

Management strategies for prosthetic joint infection: long-term infection control rates, overall survival rates, functional and quality of life outcomes

DAIR (debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention), one-stage and two-stage revision surgery are the most common management strategies for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) management. Our knowledge concerning their efficacy is based on short to medium-term low-quality studies.

Most studies report infection recurrence rates or infection-free time intervals. However, long-term survival rates of the infection-free joints, functional and quality of life outcome data are of paramount importance.

DAIR, one-stage and two-stage revision strategies are not unique surgical techniques, presenting several variables. Infection control rates for the above strategies vary from 75% to 90%, but comparisons are difficult because different indications and patient selection criteria are used in each strategy.

Recent outcome data show that DAIR and one-stage revision in selected patients (based on host, bacteriological, soft tissue and type of infection criteria) may present improved functional and quality of life outcomes and reduced costs for health systems as compared to those of two-stage revision.

It is expected that health system administrators and providers will apply pressure on surgeons and departments towards the wider use of DAIR and one-stage revision strategies. It is the orthopaedic surgeon’s responsibility to conduct quality studies in order to fully clarify the indications and outcomes of the different revision strategies.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:727-734. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210008

Use of PET-CT in diagnostic workup of periprosthetic infection of hip and knee joints: significance in detecting additional infectious focus

Introduction

The diagnosis and management of periprosthetic knee and hip infections as well as the identification and management of possible additional infectious foci is of great importance for successful therapy. This study analyses the importance of ¹⁸F deoxyglucose PET-CT (PET-CT) in the identification of additional infectious focus and subsequent impact on management of periprosthetic infection (PPI).

Material and methods

A retrospective analysis of the clinical data and findings in the period from January 2008 to December 2018 was carried out. One hundred and four patients with in-hospital treatment due to PPI of a hip or knee joint were identified and included in this study. All patients underwent a standardized clinical examination and further surgical and antibiotic therapy. The reevaluation of performed PET-CTs was specifically carried out with regard to the local PPI or detection of secondary foci.

Results

PET-CT successfully verified the PPI in 84.2% of the patients. A total of 78 possible additional foci were detected in PET-CT in 56 (53.8%) of the examined patients. Predilection sites for possible secondary foci were joints (42.3%), pulmonary (15.4%), ear-nose-throat (15.4%), spine (11.5%), and the musculocutaneous tissues (11.5%). Fifty-four positive PET-CT findings were confirmed clinically with need of additional adequate treatment.

Conclusion

PET-CT is a valuable diagnostic tool to confirm periprosthetic joint infection. At the same time, the whole-body PET/CT may detect additional foci of infection with impact on subsequent treatment strategy. PET was of special value in detecting infections at distant locations far from the primary infected joint in significant number. These distant infection locations can be potential cause of a re-infection. This clearly reflects the need of their diagnosis.

Proximal femoral reconstruction with modular megaprostheses in non-oncological patients

Introduction

Multiple revision hip arthroplasties and critical trauma might cause severe bone loss that requires proximal femoral replacement (PFR). The aim of this retrospective study was to analyse complication- and revision-free survivals of patients who received modular megaprostheses in an attempt to reconstruct massive non-neoplastic bone defects of the proximal femur.

Questions/purposes

(1) What were general complication rates and revision-free survivals following PFR? (2) What is the incidence of complication specific survivals? (3) What were risk factors leading to a diminished PFR survival?

Materials and methods

Twenty-eight patients with sufficient follow-up after receiving a modular proximal femoral megaprosthesis were identified. The indications for PFR included prosthetic joint infection (PJI), periprosthetic fracture, aseptic loosening, non-union and critical femoral fracture. Complications were grouped according to the ISOLS-classification of segmental endoprosthetic failure by Henderson et al.

Results

Overall, the complication-free survival was 64.3% at one year, 43.2% at five years and 38.4% at ten years, with 16 patients (57%) suffering at least one complication. Complications were dislocation in eight patients (29%), PJI in 6 patients (21%), periprosthetic fracture in five patients (18%), and aseptic loosening in six patients (21%). Prosthesis stem cementation showed a lower risk for revision in a cox proportional hazard model (95% CI 0.04–0.93, HR 0.2, p = 0.04).

Conclusion

PFR with modular megaprostheses represents a viable last resort treatment with high complication rates for patients with severe proximal femoral bone loss due to failed arthroplasty or critical fractures. In revision arthroplasty settings, PFR cementation should be advocated in cases of impaired bone quality.

2021 Frank Stinchfield Award: A novel cemented hip hemiarthroplasty infection model with real-time in vivo imaging in rats : an animal study

AIMS

The aims of this study were to develop an in vivo model of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in cemented hip hemiarthroplasty, and to monitor infection and biofilm formation in real-time.

METHODS

Sprague-Dawley rats underwent cemented hip hemiarthroplasty via the posterior approach with pre- and postoperative gait assessments. Infection with Staphylococcus aureus Xen36 was monitored with in vivo photoluminescent imaging in real-time. Pre- and postoperative gait analyses were performed and compared. Postmortem micro (m) CT was used to assess implant integration; field emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM) was used to assess biofilm formation on prosthetic surfaces.

RESULTS

All animals tolerated surgery well, with preservation of gait mechanics and weightbearing in control individuals. Postoperative in vivo imaging demonstrated predictable evolution of infection with logarithmic signal decay coinciding with abscess formation. Postmortem mCT qualitative volumetric analysis showed high contact area and both cement-bone and cement-implant interdigitation. FE-SEM revealed biofilm formation on the prosthetic head.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates the utility of a new, high-fidelity model of in vivo PJI using cemented hip hemiarthroplasty in rats. Inoculation with bioluminescent bacteria allows for non-invasive, real-time monitoring of infection. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7 Supple B):9-16.

Synovial Alpha-defensin at Reimplantation in Two-stage Revision Arthroplasty to Rule Out Persistent Infection

BACKGROUND/AIM

Owing to the lack of a diagnostic gold standard, ruling out persistent periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) before second-stage surgery in the setting of two-stage revision arthroplasty constitutes a major challenge. We evaluated if the alpha-defensin-1 (AD-1) test could predict successful infection eradication before reimplantation of a new prosthesis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Our prospective study included 20 patients who underwent two-stage revision arthroplasty for treatment of PJI. A standard quantitative enzyme AD-1 immunoassay of synovial fluid, the synovial leukocyte esterase test and routine laboratory blood testing were performed prior to explantation and reimplantation. Treatment failure was defined according to the Delphi-based consensus criteria after a minimum follow-up of 1 year.

RESULTS

A 15% of our patients met the Delphi Criteria within 1 year. None of the markers investigated were significantly different in patients with and without reinfection.

CONCLUSION

Further research is necessary to identify biomarkers more suitable for indicating persistent infection before reimplantation.

Economic Study of 2-Stage Exchange in Patients With Knee or Hip Prosthetic Joint Infection Managed in a Referral Center in France: Time to Use Innovative(s) Intervention(s) at the Time of Reimplantation to Reduce the Risk of Superinfection

Objective: Chronic prosthetic joint infections (PJI) are serious complications in arthroplasty leading to prosthesis exchange and potential significant costs for health systems, especially if a subsequent new infection occurs. This study assessed the cost of chronic PJI managed with 2-stage exchange at the Lyon University Hospital, CRIOAc Lyon reference center, France. A threshold analysis was then undertaken to determine the reimbursement tariff of a hypothetical preventive device usable at the time of reimplantation, which possibly enables health insurance to save money according to the risk reduction of subsequent new infection. This analysis was also performed for a potential innovative device already available on the market, a dual antibiotic loaded bone cement used to fix cemented prosthesis that releases high concentrations of gentamicin and vancomycin locally (G+V cement). Method: Patients >18 years, admitted for a hip or knee chronic PJI managed with 2-stage exchange, between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2015, were retrospectively identified. Following, resource consumption in relation to inpatient hospital stay, hospitalization at home, rehabilitation care, outpatient antibiotic treatments, imaging, laboratory analysis, and consultations were identified and collected from patient records and taken into account in the evaluation. Costs were assessed from the French health insurance perspective over the 2 years following prosthesis reimplantation. Results: The study included 116 patients (median age 67 y; 47% hip prosthesis). Mean cost of chronic PJI was estimated over the 2 years following prosthesis reimplantation at €21,324 for all patients, and at €51,697 and €15,745 for patients with (n = 18) and without (n = 98) a subsequent new infection after reimplantation, respectively. According to the threshold analysis the reimbursement tariff (i) should not exceed €2,820 for a device which can reduce the risk of a new infection by 50% and (ii) was between €2,988 and €3,984 if the G + V cement can reduce the risk of a new infection by 80% (this reduction risk is speculative and has to be confirmed by clinical trials). Conclusion: This study revealed that chronic PJI requiring a 2-stage revision is costly, with significant costs in relation to the reimplantation procedure (about 15 k€). However, following reimplantation the rate of subsequent new infection remained high, and the cost of reimplantation following a new infection is considerable, reaching 50k€ per patient. These first cost estimates of managing chronic PJI with 2-stage exchange in France underline the economic interest of preventing new infections.

Staphylococcus aureus Floating Biofilm Formation and Phenotype in Synovial Fluid Depends on Albumin, Fibrinogen, and Hyaluronic Acid

Biofilms are typically studied in bacterial media that allow the study of important properties such as bacterial growth. However, the results obtained in such media cannot take into account the bacterial localization/clustering caused by bacteria-protein interactions in vivo and the accompanying alterations in phenotype, virulence factor production, and ultimately antibiotic tolerance. We and others have reported that methicillin-resistant or methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA or MSSA, respectively) and other pathogens assemble a proteinaceous matrix in synovial fluid. This proteinaceous bacterial aggregate is coated by a polysaccharide matrix as is characteristic of biofilms. In this study, we identify proteins important for this aggregation and determine the concentration ranges of these proteins that can reproduce bacterial aggregation. We then test this protein combination for its ability to cause marked aggregation, antibacterial tolerance, preservation of morphology, and expression of the phenol-soluble modulin (PSM) virulence factors. In the process, we create a viscous fluid that models bacterial behavior in synovial fluid. We suggest that our findings and, by extension, use of this fluid can help to better model bacterial behavior of new antimicrobial therapies, as well as serve as a starting point to study host protein-bacteria interactions characteristic of physiological fluids.

Is Preoperative Identification of the Infecting Organism Essential Before Single-Stage Revision Hip Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Infection?

BACKGROUND

It is commonly stated that identification of the infecting organism is a prerequisite to single-stage revision arthroplasty of the hip for deep infection. We have performed single-stage revision in a series of patients where the organism was not identified preoperatively. The aim of this study is to investigate whether the rate of infection eradication following single-stage revision was affected by preoperative knowledge of the infecting organism.

METHODS

We identified all patients who had undergone a single-stage revision for a deep infection at our hospital between 2006 and 2015. One hundred five patients were assigned into 2 groups based upon whether the infecting organism had been identified preoperatively (group A = 28) or not (group B = 77).

RESULTS

The reinfection rates were 3.6% in group A and 9.1% for group B (P = .679). Re-revision rates were 7.1% and 9.1%, respectively (P = 1.00). Overall, the implant survival rate at 6 years was 87.9% (95% confidence interval, 97.4-78.4). In group B, preoperative aspiration was performed in 36.4% (28/77) of cases. Staphylococci species were the predominant causative organisms, with gram-negative involvement in 19.0% (20/105) of cases.

CONCLUSION

The rate of infection eradication and overall survivorship with single-stage revision was similar in our series to that reported in the literature. While desirable, we did not find identification of the infecting organism before surgery influenced the outcome. Given the functional and economic benefits of single-stage revision, we suggest that failure to identify an organism is not an absolute contraindication to this approach.

Clinical Effectiveness of Treatment Strategies for Prosthetic Joint Infection Following Total Ankle Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total ankle replacement (TAR) is a challenging complication, which often requires debridement and implant retention (DAIR) with or without polyethylene exchange, revision surgery, implantation of a cement spacer, conversion to arthrodesis, or even amputation. The optimum treatment for ankle PJI is not well established. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the clinical effectiveness of various treatment strategies for infected ankle prostheses. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library up to December 2018 for studies evaluating the impact of treatment in patient populations with infected ankle prostheses following TAR. Binary data were pooled after arcsine transformation. Six citations comprising 17 observational design comparisons were included. The reinfection rates (95% confidence intervals) for DAIR with or without polyethylene exchange, 1-stage revision, 2-stage revision, cement spacer, and arthrodesis were 39.8% (24.4 to 56.1), 0.0% (0.0 to 78.7), 0.0% (0.0 to 8.5), 0.2% (0.0 to 17.9), and 13.6% (0.0 to 45.8), respectively. Rates of amputation for DAIR with or without polyethylene exchange and cement spacer were 5.6% (0.0 to 16.9) and 22.2% (6.3 to 54.7), respectively. Measures of function, pain, and satisfaction could not be compared because of limited data. One- and 2-stage revision strategies seem to be associated with the lowest reinfection rates, but these findings are based on limited data. Arthrodesis and DAIR with or without polyethylene exchange appear to be commonly used in treating infected ankle prosthesis, but are associated with poor infection control. Clear gaps exist in the literature, and further research is warranted to evaluate treatment strategies for infected ankle prosthesis.

One-stage revision is as effective as two-stage revision for chronic culture-negative periprosthetic joint infection after total hip and knee arthroplasty

AIMS

Removal of infected components and culture-directed antibiotics are important for the successful treatment of chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, as many as 27% of chronic PJI patients yield negative culture results. Although culture negativity has been thought of as a contraindication to one-stage revision, data supporting this assertion are limited. The aim of our study was to report on the clinical outcomes for one-stage and two-stage exchange arthroplasty performed in patients with chronic culture-negative PJI.

METHODS

A total of 105 consecutive patients who underwent revision arthroplasty for chronic culture-negative PJI were retrospectively evaluated. One-stage revision arthroplasty was performed in 30 patients, while 75 patients underwent two-stage exchange, with a minimum of one year's follow-up. Reinfection, re-revision for septic and aseptic reasons, amputation, readmission, mortality, and length of stay were compared between the two treatment strategies.

RESULTS

The patient demographic characteristics did not differ significantly between the groups. At a mean follow-up of 4.2 years, the treatment failure for reinfection for one-stage and two-stage revision was five (16.7%) and 15 patients (20.0%) (p = 0.691), and for septic re-revision was four (13.3%) and 11 patients (14.7%) (p = 0.863), respectively. No significant differences were observed between one-stage and two-stage revision for 30- 60- and 90-day readmissions (10.0% vs 8.0%; p = 0.714; 16.7% vs 9.3%; p = 0.325; and 26.7% vs 10.7%; p = 0.074), one-year mortality (3.3% vs 4.0%; p > 0.999), and amputation (3.3% vs 1.3%; p = 0.496).

CONCLUSION

In this non-randomized study, one-stage revision arthroplasty demonstrated similar outcomes including reinfection, re-revision, and readmission rates for the treatment of chronic culture-negative PJI after TKA and THA compared to two-stage revision. This suggests culture negativity may not be a contraindication to one-stage revision arthroplasty for chronic culture-negative PJI in selected patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(3):515-521.

Similar risk of complete revision for infection with single-dose versus multiple-dose antibiotic prophylaxis in primary arthroplasty of the hip and knee: results of an observational cohort study in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register in 242,179 patients

Background and purpose - The optimal type and duration of antibiotic prophylaxis for primary arthroplasty of the hip and knee are subject to debate. We compared the risk of complete revision (obtained by a 1- or 2-stage procedure) for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after primary total hip or knee arthroplasty between patients receiving a single dose of prophylactic antibiotics and patients receiving multiple doses of antibiotics for prevention of PJI. Patients and methods - A cohort of 130,712 primary total hip and 111,467 knee arthroplasties performed between 2011 and 2015 in the Netherlands was analyzed. We linked data from the Dutch arthroplasty register to a survey collected across all Dutch institutions on hospital-level antibiotic prophylaxis policy. We used restricted cubic spline Poisson models adjusted for hospital clustering to compare the risk of revision for infection according to type and duration of antibiotic prophylaxis received. Results - For total hip arthroplasties, the rates of revision for infection were 31/10,000 person-years (95% CI 28-35), 39 (25-59), and 23 (15-34) in the groups that received multiple doses of cefazolin, multiple doses of cefuroxime, and a single dose of cefazolin, respectively. The rates for knee arthroplasties were 27/10,000 person-years (95% CI 24-31), 40 (24-62), and 24 (16-36). Similar risk of complete revision for infection among antibiotic prophylaxis regimens was found when adjusting for confounders. Interpretation - In a large observational cohort we found no apparent association between the type or duration of antibiotic prophylaxis and the risk of complete revision for infection. This does question whether there is any advantage to the use of prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis beyond a single dose.

One-Stage Exchange Arthroplasty for Fistulizing Periprosthetic Joint Infection of the Hip: An Effective Strategy

Background: Prosthetic hip infection (PHI) is a disastrous scenario after an arthroplasty. International guidelines contraindicate one-stage exchange arthroplasty for fistulizing chronic prosthetic hip infection (FCPHI), nevertheless few surgical teams, mostly from Europe, support one stage procedure for this indication.

Questions/Purposes: Analysis of infection recurrence and implant failure of a series of FCPHIs treated with one stage arthroplasty.

Patients and Methods: Sixty-six FCPHIs treated with one-stage exchange arthroplasty were prospectively followed up at least 2 years. Clinical, radiological and bacteriological signs suggestive of reinfection were sought, as well as implant failures and PHI related deaths.

Results: Thirty-four females and thirty-two males with median age of 69.5 years [61–77] and BMI of 26 kg/m² [22-31] were included. Fistulae were productive in 50 patients (76%). Staphylococcus was responsible for 45% of PHI and 21% were polymicrobial. Twenty-nine patients (44%) received preoperative antibiotic therapy. After a median 60-month follow-up [35–82], 3 patients (4.5%) presented reinfection (two new infections, one relapse) and 3 patients experienced implant failure (1 femoral fracture, 1 stem breakage, 1 recurrent dislocation). One death was related to PHI. After a minimum of 2 years, the infection control rate was of 95.3% (±0.02).

Conclusion: One-stage exchange arthroplasty for FCPHIs showed a good infection control rate similar to that of non-fistulizing PHI. Systematic preoperative microbiological documentation with joint aspiration and, in some specific cases, the use of preoperative antibiotic therapy are among the optimizations accounting for the success of the one-stage arthroplasty. In light of these results, and those of other studies, international recommendations could evolve.

Level of Evidence: Descriptive therapeutic prospective cohort study. Level of evidence: IV.

Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes of Staphylococcus lugdunensis Prosthetic Joint Infections: A Multicenter Retrospective Analysis

Staphylococcus lugdunensis has been increasingly recognized as a cause of serious infections, particularly prosthetic joint infections (PJIs). The aim of this study was to describe the clinical characteristics, treatments, and outcomes of S lugdunensis PJIs. This was a retrospective multicenter study of consecutive adult patients with S lugdunensis PJIs from January 2007 through December 2017; 28 patients met inclusion criteria. The knee was the most commonly affected joint (67.9%), followed by the hip (25%). Clinical and microbiologic characteristics, treatment modalities, and outcomes were evaluated. Thirteen (46.4%) patients had two-stage revision, 9 (32.1%) had debridement with or without revision, 5 (21.4%) had no surgical intervention, and 1 (3.6%) had one-stage revision. Twenty-four (85.7%) patients had monomicrobial infection with S lugdunensis, whereas 4 had polymicrobial. Two patients had concomitant bacteremia. All isolates, except 1, were susceptible to oxacillin. Three patients with no surgical intervention received oral antibiotics, 2 were not treated, and 1 was discharged to hospice. Relapse was observed in 2 of 13 (15%) patients who had two-stage revision, 4 of 9 (44%) who had debridement, and 6 of 6 (100%) who had no surgical intervention or one-stage revision regardless of antibiotic treatment regimen. There was a significant difference in cure rate for patients who underwent two-stage revision compared with other treatment modalities (85% vs 33%, P=.009). Appropriate management of S lugdunensis PJI includes both aggressive surgical treatment and a prolonged course of antibiotics and is associated with excellent clinical response. Regardless of route or duration of antibiotic therapy, relapse is high for patients not treated with two-stage revision. [Orthopedics. 2020;43(6):345-350.].

Computerized registry as a potential tool for surveillance and management of complex bone and joint infections in France: French registry of complex bone and joint infections

Aims

The French registry for complex bone and joint infections (C-BJIs) was created in 2012 in order to facilitate a homogeneous management of patients presented for multidisciplinary advice in referral centres for C-BJI, to monitor their activity and to produce epidemiological data. We aimed here to present the genesis and characteristics of this national registry and provide the analysis of its data quality.

Methods

A centralized online secured database gathering the electronic case report forms (eCRFs) was filled for every patient presented in multidisciplinary meetings (MM) among the 24 French referral centres. Metrics of this registry were described between 2012 and 2016. Data quality was assessed by comparing essential items from the registry with a controlled dataset extracted from medical charts of a random sample of patients from each centre. Internal completeness and consistency were calculated.

Results

Between 2012 and 2016, 30,607 presentations in MM were recorded corresponding to 17,748 individual patients (mean age 62.1 years (SD 18.4); 10,961 (61.8%) males). BJI was considered as complex for 63% of cases (n = 19,355), and 13,376 (44%) had prosthetic joint infections (PJIs). The controlled dataset, available for 19 centres, included 283 patients. Global consistency and completeness were estimated at 88.2% and 88.9%, respectively, considering missing items in the eCRFs as negative results.

Conclusion

This national registry is one of the largest prospective databases on BJI and its acceptable data quality parameters allow further use for epidemiological purposes.Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2020;9(9):635-644.

Meta-analysis in periprosthetic joint infection: a global bibliometric analysis

Background

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the most serious complication of joint replacement surgery. Further comorbidities include bedsore, deep vein thrombosis, reinfection, or even death. An increasing number of researchers are focusing on this challenging complication. The aim of the present study was to estimate global PJI research based on bibliometrics from meta-analysis studies.

Methods

A database search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Relevant studies were assessed using the bibliometric analysis.

Results

A total of 117 articles were included. The most relevant literature on PJI was found on Scopus. China made the highest contributions to global research, followed by the USA and the UK. The institution with the most contributions was the University of Bristol. The journal with the highest number of publications was The Journal of Arthroplasty, whereas the Journal of Clinical Medicine had the shortest acceptance time. Furthermore, the top three frequently used databases were Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane. The most frequent number of authors in meta-analysis studies was four. Most studies focused on the periprosthetic hip and knee. The alpha-defensin diagnostic test, preventive measures on antibiotics use, and risk factors of intra-articular steroid injections were the most popular topic in recent years.

Conclusion

Based on the results of the present study, we found that there was no single database that covered all relevant articles; the optimal method for bibliometric analysis is a combination of databases. The most popular research topics on PJI focused on alpha-defensin, antibiotic use, risk factors of intra-articular steroid injections, and the location of prosthetic hip and knee infection.